Finland and the Space Era

8/7/2019 Finland and the Space Era

1/36

Finland and the Space Era

Ilkka Seppinen

HSR-32

April 2003

a


2/36

ii

Title: HSR-32 Finland and the Space Era

Published by: ESA Publications DivisionESTEC, PO Box 299

2200 AG NoordwijkThe Netherlands

Editor: R.A. HarrisPrice: 10ISSN: 1638-4704ISBN: 92-9092-542-6

Copyright: 2003 The European Space AgencyPrinted in: The Netherlands


3/36

iii

Contents

1 A Modest Start .............................................................................................................................1

2 Finland participates in the IGY ....................................................................................................3

3 The Space Era opens for Finland .................................................................................................5

4 Satellites enter Finnish space research .........................................................................................7

5 Finland considers ESRO Membership in 1968............................................................................9

6 A Single Space Research Centre? ..............................................................................................13

7 Small steps forward....................................................................................................................17

8 1983: ESA, at Last! ....................................................................................................................21

9 From Earth to Mars ....................................................................................................................23

Sources

A Unpublished sources: .............................................................................................................25

B Published Sources and Literature:..........................................................................................26

Annexes

Annex 1 Highlights in the National Space Efforts....................................................................29

Annex 2 Administrative Organisation ......................................................................................30

Annex 3 Statistical Data on Space Science in Finland 1988-1992...........................................31

Annex 4 Finnish Space Funding 1995-1999; values in MEuro................................................32


4/36

iv


5/36

1

1 A Modest Start

World War 2 had isolated Finnish geophysicists within purely national activities, and the subsequent ColdWar period tended to continue this isolation.

This is illustrated by the preparations for the 1945 total solar eclipse. In May 1943 the Solar EclipseCommittee of the Finnish National IUGG (International Union of Geophysics and Geodesy) Committee,navely expressed a belief that even Soviet participation in such an important geophysical research projectwould be possible. Professor V.A. Heiskanen, a prominent figure in Finnish geophysics at that time,expressed his wish for full international cooperation, despite the raging war and Finno-Soviet hostilities.According to Heiskanen, a neutral Sweden would certainly help Finland to open the connections.1

Contacts for the Finnish Solar Eclipse Committee remained very vague and only some Swedish scientistsresponded positively.2 After the war the Finns began to strive for new western contacts. However, Finlandwas under an Allied Control Commission, dominated by the Soviets, former enemies, and not until theabolition of the Control Commission in 1947 could Finland strive to be neutral and more associated with theWest. Formal contacts of Finnish geophysicists with international organisations were restored, but in practicecontacts remained weak.

All activities amongst Finnish geophysicists remained rather weak and sporadic. The Government resourceswere scarce. For years to come, reparations to the Soviet Union constituted great cuts in the national income.Under Soviet pressure the Government even had to refuse Marshall Aid. Yet, the Government did not denythe importance of geophysics or astronomy. Research and teaching continued in these sciences at theuniversities and other research institutions. Despite limited funds the Government regularly paid membershipfees to international scientific associations.

By 1952 Finland had paid its war reparations to the Soviet Union and a boost in the Finnish Nationaleconomy was evident. The preparations for the International Geophysics Year (IGY) were going on at aninternational level, which opened a brighter vista for Finnish geophysics. After Stalins death in 1953 aperiod of dtente characterised the superpower politics. This was welcomed with enthusiasm in Finland. Atlast Finland had remarkably more freedom of action in national economics and foreign policy. Although theeconomy had not recovered very much on an absolute scale, even a small improvement was welcomed by

the Finns.

1 Minutes of the Solar Eclipse Committee of the Finnish National Committee of IUGG, 5 May 1943 and 23 October1943, (IUGG corr. 1945-1956).

2 Solar Eclipse Committees report 15 September 1945-30 April 1945 (IUGG corr. 1945-1956).


6/36

2


7/36

3

2 Finland participates in the IGY

In March 1954 the Chairman of the Finnish National Committee of IUGG, Prof. Jaakko Kernen, and theSecretary, Dr Eyvind Sucksdorff, submitted to the Ministry of Education a memorandum in which theyemphasised the unusual importance of the forthcoming Assembly of the IUGG to be held in Rome inSeptember the same year. At the conference decisions would be made about arrangements for the IGY.3

The preceding years had seen some negligence. The Finnish National Committee of the IUGG had notcompiled annual reports nor reported to IUGG about its activities since 1950. No mention of the IGY is to befound in the Finnish archives before March 1954. Awareness of the 10 th Assembly, which was to be held inSeptember 1954, led to a hasty report by Dr Sucksdorff, in April 1954, to the IUGG on the Finnish activitiesfrom the years 1951-1954. In this report IGY-related matters were emphasised, such as the foundation of aGeomagnetic Observatory in Nurmijrvi in 1952, as well as the plans to establish earth currentinstrumentation at the Sodankyl Magnetic Observatory (SGO).4 Even the Government was now willing togive its support to Finnish geophysics. On September 2, 1954, the Minister of Education announced theGovernment's decision to fund the IUGG General Assembly in Helsinki in 1960. Professor Kernenimmediately announced his Governments decision to the Assembly in Rome.5

The Importance of the IGY was fully understood by contemporary Finnish geophysicists. In Rome on 15-29September 1954, Finland was represented by a proper delegation. In the Assembly, Finland was given animportant role in the arrangements of the IGY. Jaakko Kernen and Eyvind Sucksdorff had tacticallyreferred to the Second Polar Year, organised some 25 years earlier, which had been a success for Finnishgeophysical research. The Second Polar Year had shown and ensured that geophysical research in Finlandfulfilled the requirements for accessing international co-operation.

The IGY was a forum for the establishment of new contacts and the re-establishment of old ones. Within theframework of IGY, the geographical location of Finland in the auroral zone regained its value. Itimmediately elevated Finland back to the international level. It brought to Finland observational instrumentsfrom the international scientific community. Germans contributed an ionosonde of the Max-Planck-Instituteto the Sodankyl Geophysical Observatory. Further, the Finnish National Board of Post andTelecommunications paid for the installation of the ionosonde at the Nurmijrvi Geophysical Observatory.Geophysical communities from 66 countries took part in the IGY.6

In conjunction with the start of the IGY, the very first artificial satellite was launched in 1957. Although theSoviets had promised to participate in the IGY program with an Earth-orbiting satellite, the launch ofSputnik I came as a great surprise, if not as a great political threat and challenge. 7 With the launch ofSputnik I a very rapid development of rocket and satellite technology was initiated on both sides of theAtlantic.

Satellites offered an opportunity for geophysical researchers to investigate in situ upper atmospheric andnear-space phenomena that had up to that time mainly been studied by ground-based observations, withballoons to a few tens of kilometres or sounding rockets to no higher than 250 km. Sputnik Iorbited at analtitude of 500 km. A new dimension of space research was opened to geophysics and Finnish geophysicistswere prepared to participate in the new programme.

3 Finnish National Committee of the IUGG Chairman Kernen and Secretary E. Sucksdorff: Aide mmoire forMinistry of Education 18 March 1954 (IUGG corr. 1945-1956).

4 Report of the Finnish National Committee, 2 April 1954 (IUGG corr. 1954-1956).5 Minister of Education to the Finnish National Committee of IUGG 9 Sept. 1954 (IUGG corr. 1945-1956).6 J. Krige and A. Russo,A History of ESA,vol. 1, p. 5; Walter Sullivan:Assault on the Unknown, Preface p. vii.7 Jan Stiernstedt: Sweden in Space, p. 5; Roger Bilstein: Orders of Magnitude, p. 47.


8/36

4


9/36

5

3 The Space Era opens for Finland

If Finland wanted to stay abreast of the development of space research, somehow she had to get a grip onsatellite projects. To start with, the Government funded satellite observations from the year 1958 with anappropriation of 2.5 Million FIM (44200 Euro in 2002).8 Astronomy Professor Gustaf Jrnefelt at theUniversity of Helsinki had organised the observation project. The importance of these arrangements can beseen as preparatory actions towards Finnish membership in the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR).9

COSPAR was established in 1958 as the most important subcommittee for space research under ICSU(International Committee of Scientific Unions). It was a step towards the internationalisation of spaceactivities, with a balanced representation of both superpowers. The chairmen were to be appointed by theboard of COSPAR, and of the two deputy chairmen one ought to be a US and the other a Soviet citizen.10Finland certainly profited greatly from this development.

Why did Finland not join COSPAR in 1958 when the organisation was established and Finlands interests inspace research had its most evident advocate in Professor Jrnefelt? An adequate reason for Finlandshesitation to join COSPAR could have been the lack of readiness. Only the participation in the IGY activatedFinnish geophysical research from its post-war quiescence. Finnish geophysicists or astronomers did not

have the psychological, or the organisational prerequisites needed for prompt membership when the idea wasproposed. However, in January 1961 Professor Gustaf Jrnefelt was able to state to the Chairman, H.C. vande Hulst, that Finlands membership in COSPAR was only a question of time. The membership fee wasUS$ 1000 (5000 Euro in 2002).11 Such a limited expense could not have been the real obstacle, not even forthe Government.

No doubts were ever raised in COSPAR concerning possible Finnish membership. On the contrary, theSecretary of COSPAR, F.H.M. van Straelen, seems to have taken the initiative for Finnish membership, inOctober 1960, in an quite casual manner. Van Straelen addressed an application form to Jrnefelt at theFinnish Academy of Sciences and Letters, stating that it could be used in the event that Finland intended tojoin COSPAR informally.12 For the time being Finland was not yet ready, but this did not disturb COSPAR.In February 1961, van de Hulst invited Jrnefelt to attend the General Assembly to be held in Florence inApril of the same year. In the margin of the invitation letter van de Hulst had written by hand: I hope thatyou will be able to come yourself! COSPAR had indeed integrated diplomacy into its policy. Furthermore,

van de Hulst offered that COSPAR could pay up to US$ 400 for travel expenses, with the support ofUNESCO and some foundations.13

Frankly, it could be said that COSPAR was in a sense putting pressure on Finland to submit its application.In March 1963 van de Hulst reminded Jrnefelt of the UNESCO support available for Finnish participationin the General Assembly held in Washington DC. Somewhat later, the Secretary of COSPAR, P.J. Beaulieu,wrote to the Finnish COSPAR inquiring why they had not received any news from Prof. Y. Visl and hisassistant, Dr L. Oterma, even though they had been invited to attend the COSPAR Symposium onOpportunities for Small Scale Space Research in Washington DC. Beaulieu suspected the reason to be alack of sufficient finances, and gently hinted at the travel support available.14 In the same context Beaulieureminded Jrnefelt of the above-mentioned symposium to be held in Washington, and he noted politely that

8 About 40000 AU; Gustaf Jrnefelt/HU to van de Hulst/ COSPAR 31 Jan.1961 (GJA/GEO). 2.5 MFIM in 1958 isequivalent to about 42000 Euro in 2002.

9 F.H.M. van Straelen/COSPAR to Gustaf Jrnefelt/HU Nov. 17,1960, and Gustaf Jrnefelt to van de Hulst:COSPAR 31 Jan.1961 (GJA/GEO).

10 G. Haerendel, et al: 40 Years of Cospar, p.5- 6; Walter Sullivan:Assault on the Unknown, p. 410-412.11 About 5000 AU; Minutes of the Committee established by the Finnish Academy of Sciences and Letters for

preparation to join COSPAR, 5 Nov. 1963 (GJA/GEO).12 COSPAR/F.H.M. van Straelen to Jrnefelt in the Finnish Academy of Sciences and Letters, 7 Nov. 1960

(GJA/GEO).13 COSPAR/van de Hulst to Jrnefelt, 20 Feb. 1961, (GJA/GEO).14 COSPAR to the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR, 6 March 1962 (GJA/GEO).


10/36

6

the symposium should certainly raise interest in Finland, where the scientists had shown lively activity in thisfield.15

NASA took part in this symposium as well, as did the United Nations. In response to a UN-launched projecton Peaceful Exploitation of Space the Ministry of Foreign Affairs requested Professor Jrnefelt to preparea position statement on the issue. In autumn 1963 the Finnish Academy of Sciences and Letters formed acommittee to prepare Finlands adhesion to COSPAR. Professor Gustaf Jrnefelt acted as chairman and the

other members were Matti Franssila the Director of the Finnish Meteorological Institute, T. J. Kukkamkithe Director of the Finnish Geodetic Institute, Professor of Meteorology at the University of Helsinki, LauriA. Vuorela and Pekka Jauho the Director of the Government Technology Centre. The committee providedthe justifications needed and the organ capable of acting. Finland was now ready to join and on 2 June 1964,Finland was accepted as a member of COSPAR.16

The Finnish National Committee of COSPAR was created and nominated by the Finnish Academy ofScience and Letters. As the Finnish Academy of Science and Letters was a private association, yet with somepublic tasks in the science administration, Finland had no specific organisation dedicated to space research.Since geophysics and astronomy had traditionally been practised at several government institutions anduniversities, the situation caused unnecessary confusion among representatives from different researchgroups.

15 COSPAR to Jrnefelt, 15 March 1963 (GJA/GEO).16 COSPAR Chairman Maurice Roy to Chairman R. Koskimies of the Finnish Academy of Sciences and Letters

2 June 1964 (FNC/COSPAR).


11/36

7

4 Satellites enter Finnish space research

Membership of COSPAR contributed to bringing Finnish geophysical research into space research.Especially notable was Prof. Martti Tiuri, who became a member of the Finnish National Committee ofCOSPAR in 1964, its Secretary in 1965 and Chairman in 1969.17 His activity continued for more than twodecades, with a clear aim of participating in satellite missions. For him, the important thing in spaceactivities was high technology and its spin-off effects on Finnish industry and the economy, and ultimatelyon the image of the country.18 In particular he linked technology with space research in Finland in the mid1960s.

Space research in the form of pure science has long traditions in Finland. It was based on geophysicalresearch involving geomagnetism and auroral studies. These research areas are still important for spaceresearch, and even for planetary research. Astronomy represents the third traditional space research areafound in Finland. It started at the Royal Academy in Turku in the 17th century and moved with the Academyto Helsinki, where the Academy was transformed into the Imperial Alexander University in the early19th century. From the mid 1960s to early 1980s, supporters of technology and of traditional science seemedto clash with each other. In time a change of generations dissolved the strain and joining the European SpaceAgency (ESA) as an associate member in 1987 finally cleared the way for a new approach to space science,

where science acts as a catalyst for the development of space technology.

Artificial satellites represented modernity and dynamics within the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR.Space research was considered the forefront of progress in science and particularly in the natural sciences.COSPAR was a global organisation where matters were considered only at a general level. The EuropeanSpace Research Organisation (ESRO), and European Launcher Development Organisation (ELDO) wereestablished as its more pragmatically oriented twins.19

Officially, Finland never applied for membership in ESRO or ELDO, but it is not surprising to see that theFinnish National Committee of COSPAR, during the chairmanship of Professor Tiuri, carefully investigatedthe ESRO membership option. Following his retirement, Professor Jrnefelt, the first chairman of theNational COSPAR Committee, was succeeded by Prof. T.J. Kukkamki, who had acted as secretary of theCommittee. Professor Kukkamki served as chairman for a short period before Prof. Martti Tiuri waselected. Professor Kukkamki was rather conservative and actually a geodesist, for whom a satellite was just

a superb triangulation tower.

In May 1964 Professor Tiuri gave a report to the Committee in which he emphasised that space research wasdefined elsewhere as research using rocket and satellite technologies. In April 1964 he had attended for thefirst time, with Dr Juhani Oksman from the University of Oulu, a space research meeting held by theScandinavian countries at the Kiruna Geophysical Observatory in Kiruna, Sweden (established on 2 July1957, on the second day of the IGY).20 In March 1964, Sweden and ESRO had reached an agreement onestablishing ESRANGE, a rocket launch facility to be located within the town limits of Kiruna, the activitiesof which could then be initiated.21 Sweden and Denmark were already involved in CERN, and becameinvolved in ESRO right from its start.Norway had its own rocket programme that was administered by apermanent national space committee. The programme at ESRANGE included sounding rockets with 30 kgpayloads, carried to altitudes of 150-250 km. According to Professor Tiuris report, Sweden, Denmark and Norway were looking at the use of rockets and satellites for scientific space research. The report also

mentioned that the design and construction of the first European satellite was in progress and that the

17 Prof. Martti Tiuri/FNC/COSPAR to Pirkko Mela/Ministry of Education, 18 Oct. 1965 (FNC/COSPAR).18 Martti Tiuri, private communication.19 A History of ESA, J.Krige and A. Russo, Vol. 1, Chapter 1, p. 13-33 gives a full account of the process;

Jan Stiernstedt: Sweden in Space. p. 6-7; Haerendel et al.: 40 Years of COSPAR. p. 16, in it Jacques Blamont:A Few Souvenirs from COSPARs Early History.

20 Martti Tiuri: aide mmoire: Space Research in Nordic countries, 22 April 1964 (FNC/COSPAR); C. Sucksdorff:Earth Magnetism and Aeronomy, 1964. s.d., probably January 1965 (IUGG).

21 Jan Stiernstedt: op. cit. p. 11-12, 108.


12/36

8

Swedish Aircraft Company SAAB was involved in this project. Sweden paid 3.6 Million crowns(0.41 Million Euro in 2002) for its ESRO membership and at the same time invested the same amount on itsnational space research efforts. In May 1964, at the General Assembly of COSPAR in Florence, ProfessorTiuri reiterated his opinion on the definition of space research.22

Dr Oksman did not fully share Tiuris opinion. Oksman stated that ESRO membership and rockets were anextremely expensive business. Instead he recommended involvement in establishing receiving stations

serving a Nordic network of stratospheric balloons. Furthermore, Finland could offer satellite receivingfacilities. Oksman also moderated the terms set by Tiuri for space research. According to him, space researchwas research of the upper atmosphere with instruments positioned in situ during the measurements. Namely,stratospheric balloons up to altitudes of 30-40 km, sounding rockets up to altitudes of about 250 km, andartificial satellites up to the outer limits of the atmosphere and beyond. According to Oksman, theScandinavian countries were already actively using these kinds of instruments.23 Radars were not mentioned.

The meeting in Kiruna had an important impact on Finnish space research. Finns had now a close view ofongoing Scandinavian projects and observed that Sweden was also reorganising its scattered space researchorganisation. In general, it could be argued that it was through Sweden, Denmark and Norway that Finlandhad entered into modern space research at an international level, in addition to becoming a member ofCOSPAR. The Finns gained through Sweden a European vision of the state of space research, not only inScandinavia, but also in ESRO, as well as of ESROs role in Sweden.

22 Martti Tiuri: Report on COSPAR meeting in Florence, 8-20 May 1964 (FNC/COSPAR).23 Juhani Oksman, Report on Kiruna meeting 4 May 1964 (FNC/COSPAR).


13/36

9

5 Finland considers ESRO Membership in 1968

In April 1968, Vaisala Ltd, the foremost of the few high technology companies in Finland at that time,contacted Professor Tiuri through the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR. Vaisala proposed that theNational Committee should take the appropriate measures to investigate Finlands possibilities to join ESRO.

Vaisala saw in ESRO membership an opportunity to increase the demand for its instruments and devices andto gain other market benefits. This reasoning was justifiable. ESRO acquired instruments and devices solelyfrom its Member States. The long negotiation between Vaisala and ESRANGE on radio wind sondes hadfailed because Finland was not a member of ESRO. Moreover, in its proposal Vaisala emphasised thatFinland should actively participate in the scientific and technological activities in order to keep up with thelatest technology. This was the only way to cope with competition and to benefit from technology transfer.Finally, Vaisala emphasised the significance of ESRO in promoting space research for peaceful purposes,and pointed out ESROs political independence.24

These were all the same justifications that have been used subsequently. Vaisalas communication was areply to the inquiry made by the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR. At a meeting on 20 April 1968Professor Kukkamki had raised the question of Finlands membership in ESRO. According to Professor

Kukkamki Vaisala had shown interest, and the committee decided to request more detailed information.

25

Vaisala provided industrial justifications and the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR acted as apromoter and initiator.

The National Committee of COSPAR took the issue seriously and sought a breakthrough. High expectationswere foreseen within international space research and technology. The experimental rocket station of ESRO,ESRANGE, was under development in Sweden.The USA and the Soviet Union were, ever more frequently,launching telecommunication, weather, and scientific satellites into Earth orbit and further into space. 26 Inthe autumn of 1968 Chairman Jrnefelt and Secretary Tiuri wrote: We are expecting continuing progress inthe field of space research.27

Professor Tiuri was at that time in close contact with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which he urged to takeaction towards joining ESRO. In 1967 and 1968 one such memorandum circulated in the Ministries ofForeign Affairs, Communications, and Defence. The Ministry of Defence noted that ESRO was not a

military institution, but refrained from a view, either in favour of or against possible membership. TheMinistry of Communications was flatly against joining ESRO.28 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not produce a statement, but rather a report to the ESC (European Space Conference) Meeting on 11-14November, 1968, in which ESRO was considered in a very negative way.29 The Finnish Government did notsee any advantage in joining ESRO. The viewpoint was mainly economic.

Politically, Finland still had one option. On 19 August 1968 Dr Matti Franssila, Director-General of theFinnish Meteorological Institute (FMI), had discussed with Klaus Hkknen, Undersecretary in the Ministryof Communications, a proposal for a joint Nordic institution in space research.30 Nordic cooperation hadoften proved to be a refuge for Finnish governments from the distress of superpower politics. Franssila andHkknen decided to ask the opinion of the National Committee of COSPAR about a memorandum coveringthis issue. Chairman Jrnefelt and Secretary Tiuri warmly approved the proposal, and thereby expected a firststage of reorganisation of the national space sector. The National Committee hoped for a breakthrough andfor this purpose, in October 1968, the Committee adopted the following programme:

24 Vaisala Ltd to FNC/COSPAR 25 April 1968 (FNC/COSPAR).28 Finnish National Committee of COSPAR, Minutes, 20 April 1968 (FNC/COSPAR).26 R. Bilstein: Orders of Magnitude, p. 82-83.27 FNC/COSPAR/Jrnefelt and Tiuri to the Finnish Delegation of the Nordic Council, 10 Oct.1968 (FNC/COSPAR).28 Ministry of Communications and Defence reports to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 12 Dec. 1968 (UM90AASK).29 European Space Cooperation, Memorandun, 25 Nov. 1968 (UM90EY).30 FMI/Director Franssila to the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR Chairman Jrnefelt 19 Aug. 1968, with

supplement Medlemsfrslag om nordisk samarbete p rymdomrde (FNC/COSPAR).


14/36

10

A joint organ for the Nordic space sector will be established within the framework of

collaboration of the Nordic Council. Finland will be in this respect represented by the National

Advisory Council on Space, which will be responsible for gathering the existing know-how andorganisational capacity in the space sector. Finland will participate immediately in the

EUROSPACE-conference, and Finland intends to join immediately ESRO as observer. Thisprocedure should not cause any political obstacles, since European neutral countries are members

of both organisations.31

The first step towards the realisation of this programme was soon taken. On 12 December 1968 the Ministryof Education appointed a Committee on Space Research, with Prof. Martti Tiuri as its chairman. 32 TheCommittee on Space Research was divided into two sections. One section focused on surveying the spaceresearch carried out in Finland and on evaluating Finlands position within the international space researchcommunity. The other section would assess the significance of space research for Finnish industry and othereconomic sectors. In addition, the Committee was also to draft proposals on how to promote spaceactivities.33 To fulfil these tasks the Committee carefully investigated the organisation of space research inthe other Nordic and European countries. As its very first action the Committee recommended to theMinistry of Foreign Affairs that Finland should join INTELSAT.34 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs set up agroup of observers to attend the INTELSAT conference held at the end of February 1969. 35 Thisarrangement led to membership of INTELSAT in 1972.36

At the end of April 1969, the Committee had finalised the first draft version of its report. It listed variousapplications of space research from ore prospecting to prevention of forest fires.37 These activitiesconstituted only a part of space research and poorly reflected the ambitions of modern space research. Theoveremphasis on applied research was probably chosen to appeal to the Government. Nonetheless, the reportwas only a draft, and the real interest of the committee was seen in the attention it paid to the possible ESROmembership.

In February 1969, a representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs met with Dr J.R.U. Page, the Head ofScientific Communication of ESRO. The Ministry reported on the meeting to the Committee on SpaceResearch. There is no information available here on the content of that report, but the Committee consideredthe matter of such interest that the Chairman, Tiuri and the Secretary, Seppo Urpo, visited the Headquartersof ESRO in Paris and the research centre in Noordwijk, the Netherlands.38 The Foreign Ministry wasresponsible for organising the meeting. The delegation was strengthened by representatives of the Finnish

Embassy in Paris and by a representative of the Finnish industry. The reception was cordial, as expected. InParis the delegation was received by the Director General of ESRO, Professor Hermann Bondi, theAdministrative Director, M. Depasse, who was responsible for the Legal and International Affairs,Dr Kaltenecker, the Head of the Office of the Director General, Mr Schalin, Dr J.R.U. Page, and Dr Isotta,responsible for Documentation and Information Services. ESRO had proposed the following discussiontopics: possible forms of collaboration between ESRO and Finland, questions relating to ESRANGE, andfinally all those subjects Finland wished to have placed under discussion.39

31 FNC/COSPAR/Jrnefelt and Tiuri to the Finnish Delegation in the Nordic Council, 10 Oct. 1968(FNC/COSPAR).

32 Ministry of Education to Professor Martti Tiuri, 12 Dec. 1968 (FNC/COSPAR).33 Working plan of Space Committee, Martti Tiuri, 9 Jan. 1969 (FNC/COSPAR).

34 Space Committee to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 20 Jan. 1969 (FNC/COSPAR).35 Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Karhilo to Space Committee, 18 Feb. 1969 (FNC/COSPAR). Chairman of delegation

was Secretary of the Finnish Embassy Pekka Malinen, members Prof. Martti Tiuri and Holger Rotkirch fromMinistry of Foreign Affairs.

36 Pentti O. Krkkinen, Aide mmoire: Proposals in the Space Research Committee requiring political decision, 10Feb. 1970 (UM90YE); Risto Pellinen: Suuntana Mars p. 62.

37 Draft to paper of Space Committee, 29 April 1969 (FNC/COSPAR).38 Space Commitee to Foreingn Ministry, 11 April 1969 (FNC/COSPAR).39 Mr Pietinen from Finnish Embassy in Paris, 22 May 1969, over Foreing Ministry to Space Committee

(FNC/COSPAR); Martti Tiuri and Seppo Urpo: Travel report to Paris and Noordwijk 1969, 5 June1969(UM90AEE)


15/36

11

Director General Bondi clarified the possible forms of collaboration. According to him full membership wasthe best option for both parties concerned. This was accepted unanimously.40 Full membership wasdemanding and at that time Finland hardly fulfilled any of the requirements. But, according to ESROrepresentatives, the observer status that Finland was seeking was not worth negotiating. Instead, theyrecommended collaborative agreements. These could be agreed upon taking into consideration the needs andopportunities. Through this arrangement ESRO projects would be opened to Finnish industry, and as Bondi phrased it, this sounded precisely like what Finland was seeking. In Noordwijk the delegation wascordially received by Director W. Kleen. In both meetings the atmosphere was very friendly andcollaborative.The report of the delegation to Ministry of Foreign Affairs had an overall enthusiastic tone.41

Prior to its visit to ESRO, the Finnish National Committee on Space Research opened contacts with spaceresearch officials in the Soviet Union through the Soviet-Finnish Committee on Scientific and TechnologicalCooperation. The first purpose of these contacts was to obtain information on the situation in the SovietUnion, but in the long run the Committee sought to create an exchange programme in the field of spaceresearch between the Soviet Union and Finland.42 The space research programme of the Soviet Union wasnot entirely unknown. Contacts were made with Soviet scientists through COSPAR Assemblies.43 Finnishscientists in the fields of meteorology and geodesy worked normally with their Soviet counterparts. 44Moreover, at that time the Soviet space researchers were seeking contacts in the West, but only France andItaly had responded to these efforts.45

Soon after the excursion to the ESRO Headquarters, the Report of the Space Committee was published(14 October 1969). In this report emphasis was put on technology, to be followed by space research thatwould raise the level of knowhow, improve research methods and promote expansion of new routes fordevelopment. The report also stated that space research as a multidisciplinary activity should not be confinedto a single institute, but should be encouraged at any research institute or university. Even establishing aspace policy centre was not fully excluded. It was also explicitly stated that the Helsinki University ofTechnology should have a Laboratory (Department) of Space Technology. According to the committeereport space industry is mainly electronics, which would be highly suitable for Finland. The essentialfoundations must be laid through Government subsidies for Finnish space industry, as well as throughsuitable international associations, which could provide orders for Finnish industry. This was certainly a hintat membership of ESRO and of COST (Cooperation in the Field of Science and Technology), an industrialprogramme for advancement of high technology by the EEC- and EFTA-countries.46 It was proposed thatwithin five years space activities should be financed by the Government at a level of one Finnish Mark per

inhabitant (equivalent to 1 Euro in 2002). This was at that time the common Nordic level for space activities.In addition the Committee proposed the funding of a permanent National Advisory Space Council to operateunder the Ministry of Communications. 47 The Helsingin Sanomat, the largest daily newspaper in Finland,supported the proposals made by the committee and labelled Finland in its leader article as anunderdeveloped country in space research.48

40 Martti Tiuri and Seppo Urpo: Report of travel to Paris and Noordwijk to familiarise with ESRO, 3-5 June 1969,5 June 1969 (FNC/COSPAR).

41 Ibidem.

42 Space Committee to General Secretary Paukkunen of Finno-Soviet Science-technological CooperationCommittee, 24 May 1969 (FNC/COSPAR).

43 Finnish National Committee of COSPAR to Secretariat of COSPAR, 26 April 1969, a report of delegation,Prof. Martti Tiuri.

44 The IUGG Chairman was a Soviet Professor V.V. Belousov, Secretary of the IUGG Leon Knopoff of California,General Secretary of IUGG Knopoff to Prof. Kukkamki 18.11.1965 (IUGG).

45 Haerendel et al., 40 Years of COSPAR, p. 17.46 Fifty Year of Environmental Measurements, p. 64.47 Publication of Space Committee, 14 Oct. 1969 (FNC/COSPAR).48 Helsingin Sanomat, 16 Nov. 1969, Avaruustutkimuksen kehitysmaa (An underdeveloped country in Space

Research).


16/36

12


17/36

13

6 A Single Space Research Centre?

At the end of the1960s, concern was felt that without rapid and adequate contributions to space research andtechnology Finland would fail to keep up with economic developments elsewhere. The development of newrocket and satellite technology advanced very quickly in the USA and the Soviet Union.49 ESRANGE startedits operation in Sweden with the involvement of ESRO members.50 From the Finnish point of view, theCOST Programme initiated by the EEC countries in 1969 particularly seemed to give problems. With thesupport of the COST the EEC- and EFTA-countries sought new technological progress to improve andmaintain their competitiveness.51 Unfortunately, Finland was not even invited to participate in the project.

It is alarming to be left out, Finnish Meteorological Institute Director General Lauri A. Vuorela wrote tothe Ministry of Foreign Affairs in May 1972. After the submission of the report by the Committee on SpaceResearch no substantial measures had been taken. But in 1970, the overall situation improved when the oldand troublesome way of applying for funds through the Natural Science Council, which operated under theMinistry of Education, was replaced by the Academy of Finland as a governmental office for researchfunding.52 Through the activity of Professor Tiuri in the newly founded Academy of Finland a Section (i.e. astanding committee) for Space Research was established in 1970 53 as a surrogate for a permanent NationalAdvisory Council on Space, which the Committee on Space Research had proposed, but which had not given

any signs of coming into existence. Space research now had a visible position amongst the sciences in theAcademy of Finland.

Professor Vuorelas letter to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in May 1972 was preceded by a question presented by the General Secretary of COSPAR Zdzislaw Niemirowicz. He politely inquired whetherFinland was interested in hosting a General Assembly of COSPAR. Vuorela welcomed the idea, but made aremark, as a member of the Section of Space Research of the Academy of Finland, about the ESROmembership recommended by the Committee on Space Research. According to Vuorela at least observerstatus would be necessary for Finland, since the fact of not being a member hinders the opportunities ofreceiving education, information and data for research purposes. Moreover, it prevents our electronicsindustry from obtaining subcontracts, and our researchers from participating in research programmes withour own instrument projects. Particularly now, in conjunction with the first ESRO geostationary satellite[which] will be launched at the end of 1976, the fact that we are not members raises great concern.54

A few years later Finland had still not become a member of an international space organisation besidesINTELSAT. The establishment of ESA, the European Space Agency, in 1975, to replace its precursors,ESRO and ELDO, was on the agenda of the meeting of the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR inAugust 1973. The cooperation agreements with ESA that would enable participation in separate, individual projects was still considered to be a more plausible alternative than the more expensive option of fullparticipation in the scientific programmes of ESA. Since this was the case, the committee decided to proposeto the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that Finland should seek to participate in the Meteorological, Geodetic andEarth Observation programmes.55 This meant that Finland was still at the same point as in June 1969.

49 R. Bilstein: Orders of Magnitude, p. 88-91, 84-88.50 Jan Stiernstedt: Sweden in Space, p. 53, where Stiernstedt calls ESRANGE The Entry Ticket to Europe;

J. Krige and A. Russo,A History of ESA, vol. 1, p. 48, 52.

48 Fifty years of Environmental Measurements. p. 64.52 Kari Immonen: Suomen Akatemia suomalaisessa tiedepolitiikassa 1970-luvulla, Helsinki 1995 (Academy of

Finland and Finnish science policy in the 1970s). A basic monograph on the science policy changes in Finland inthe 1960s and 1970s.

53 Aide memoire/Professor Tiuri:A Section of Space Research established in the Academy of Finland, Nov. 26, 1970(FNC/COSPAR); Academy of Finland, chairman Olavi Gran to Ministry of Foreign Affairs Oct. 28, 1970(UM90AM).

54 FMI/Director Lauri A. Vuorela to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 5 Sept. 1972. Report of attendance at ameeting abroad (FNC/COSPAR).

55 Invitation to the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR meeting 20 Aug. 1973, and Finnish NationalCommittee of COSPAR Minutes 28 Aug. 1973 (FNC/COSPAR).


18/36

14

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs had followed ESRO and ELDO intensively since 1964. First it was a routinefollow-up as a part of West European policy monitoring. Gradually the Ministry of Foreign Affair indicateda growing interest in West European space efforts and their effects on questions of interest to Finnish foreignpolicy, such as West European integration, its relation to America as a self-assertion and to the Soviet Unionin a relaxed coexistence.56 That was interesting enough to the Finnish foreign political leadership, especiallyto President Urho Kekkonen.57 It was highly interesting, even highly important for Finland, but there was nonecessity to react in any way. In the autumn of 1970 all was possible. The Finns felt that ESRO could havecollapsed if Britain had refused to participate in the launcher programme. In that case, America, with itsPost-Apollo Program, would inevitably have achieved a globally dominant position in the entire satellitebusiness.58 After a couple of years, in June 1973, at the time of the ESC Meeting, ESRO was in a much betterposition, as the Finnish Embassy reported, and even an important political message was heard. Belgium andFrance stressed that with the ever growing importance of operational satellites in telecommunication,meteorology and remote sensing etc., Europe, seeking political and economic independence, could not acceptcomplete dependence on US launchers,59 because satellites were becoming important for telecommunicationsetc. This report went to President Kekkonen, among others.60

The Finnish political lite monitored the process in and around ESRO and ELDO with a keen but politicaleye. By far the most important intermediary between the Foreign Ministry and space research circles in thefirst half of the 1970s was Professor Martti Tiuri. His message for the political lite was always the same:Join ESRO, then ESA, for the sake of Finlands development. Tiuri was on a Foreign Ministry posting list,

so he got full information on all space research related matters monitored by the Foreign Ministry. He wasthe chairman of the Finnish National Committee of COSPAR, to be sure, but after all COSPAR was just acivilised club to discuss theoretically interesting matters in a pleasant atmosphere.

At the start of the 1970s Tiuri led an effort to change the Space Research Section of the Academy ofFinland into a leading organ of Finnish space research. Although the main purpose of the Academy ofFinland was to support science financially, to direct national science policy and to promote internationalcooperation, it was still a political agency that in the years 1970-1975 was affected by serious domestic political crises.61 In addition, the Oil Crisis in November 1973 and the high inflation rate in 1973-76certainly hampered Tiuris plans to change the Space Research Section of the Academy of Finland into ANational Organisation of Space Activities.62

It was at this point, in November 1975, that the Chairman of the Council of the Academy of Finland,Professor Helge Gyllenberg and Director of Research Elisabeth Helander, said no to the practical

propositions for action thar Professor Tiuri had generated in order to give flesh to his ideas.63 That was the

56 Lennart Eckenberg, Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Aide mmoire: European Space Conference, 27 August1970, and Pentti O. Krkkinen, Aide mmoire: European Space Conference 4, Brussels 22-24 July 1970,24 July1970, and Bo hdahl, aide mmoire: Nordic position on 4. European Space Conference, part 2,9 Sept. 1970 (UM90AASK).

57 Lennart Eckenberg, Swedish Foreign Ministry, Aide mmoire: European Space Conference, 27 August 1970(UM90AASK). Document reveals a Nordic collaboration in monitoring European space cooperation, which is inthe paper unhesitatingly connected to the whole question of the EEC; Pentti O. Krkkinen, Aide mmoire:European Space Conference 4, Brussels 22-24 July 1970, 24 July 1970 (UM90AASK). In this documentformulations are clear concerning relations to the USA; Bo hdahl, Aide mmoire: Nordic position on 4.European Space Conference, part 2, 9 Sept. 1970 (UM90AASK). This document expresses the view that Finland

has no economic interests, but only political.58 Report on a Nordic conference between Sandgren, Brynskov, Rantanen, Lykke, Stiernstedt, 20 Oct. 1970

(UM90EY).59 Report from Brussels to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 13 July 1973 (UM90AASK 90/1408).60 Report from Brussels to Foreign Ministry, 13 July1973 (UM90AASK 90/1408).61 Kari Immonen: Suomen Akatemia, ibid.62 Space Activities in Finland 1975, Chairman Martti Tiuri and Secretary Seppo Urpo, 9 Feb. 1976 (UM90ESA

50/1393).63 Academy of Finland, Leading Committee, Chairman Helge Gyllenberg and Research Director Elisabet Helander

to Foreign Ministry, 25 Nov. 1975, and Space Activities in Finland 1975, Martti Tiuri and Seppo Urpo 9 Feb1975 (UM90ESA 50/1393).


19/36

15

end of the Section of Space Research in the Academy of Finland, and it was a lethal blow to the idea of aconcentrated centre for space research in Finland up to now.

The drive for Finnish membership in ESRO, later ESA, continued. In particular, a memorandum issued bythe Section of Space Research at the Academy of Finland 64 was widely circulated in Finnish governmentalcircles. Finally, in May 1976 the question of Finnish membership in ESA was brought up for discussion at aministerial level. That process led to a meeting of ministries in the same month. Now the question of joining

ESA was for the first time evaluated seriously. The meeting concluded that joining was too expensive incomparison to the benefits, but did not close the matter.65 This was the first of several governmentalmeetings, which eventually led to the goal, but only after ten years. In november 1976 Klaus Trnudd, theDeputy Director of the Foreign Ministrys Political Department, which was under the direct surveillance ofPresident Kekkonen, dealt with a set of reports, aides mmoire and evaluations from the GovernmentalScience Council, a science-political evaluations body in the Ministry of Education, and sent them to theForeign Ministrys management group, which came directly under President Kekkonen. Somebody markedwith pencil on the side of the main paper: Why not! No obstacles!66

That was the moment closest to succes and then the matter again drifted further. The governmentadministration could not yet find unanimity. The matter continued to lie on the table, but sufficient politicalsupport was still missing.

64 Martti Tiuri/The Section of Space Research of Academy of Finland, PM: Finland and ESA, 25 April 1975(UM90ESA).

65 Aide mmoire from a meeting about the question of joining ESA, 24 May 1976 (UM90ESA).66 Klaus Trnudd/Foreign Ministry, 25 Nov. 1976 (UM90ESA). The handwriting is not that of President Kekkonen,

but of someone from the management group.


20/36

16


21/36

17

7 Small steps forward

A Great Leap towards building satellite instrumentation had narrowly failed. Even if the first attempt tocreate a central, politically, economically, and scientifically capable centre for space research in Finland andthe attempt to gain Finnish membership in ESA in 1976 had both failed, these activities had set the wheelsrolling. That great apparatus of governmental administration gained momentum and gradually prepared theground for a positive solution.

The position of Dr Christian Sucksdorff, as the Head of the Geomagnetic Division at the FinnishMeteorological Institute, made him the person responsible for understanding the significance of themagnetosphere, not only as a physical phenomenon, but as a factor in science policy. During the 1970sSucksdorff first formulated a strategy that eventually raised the Geomagnetic Division to the position ofleading institution in Finnish space research.

The focus of Finnish space research shifted from organisational activities to actual scientific research,especially as the International Magnetospheric Study (IMS) was starting. The winners were those institutesthat had shown interest in research. The Universities of Helsinki, Oulu and Turku, and the FinnishMeteorological Institute had strong existing ties to the international space research community which

responded positively to the Finnish interest in becoming involved in space projects. As mentioned above, thefounding of the Academy of Finland in 1970 significantly improved the funding situation for scientificresearch in Finland.

In the 1970s magnetospheric physics stood at the forefront of space research in Finland. During the IGY(1959) the magnetosphere surrounding the Earth was found to be essential for life on Earth; it screensharmful radiation from reaching the surface of the Earth and prevents oxygen from leaking out from theatmosphere. Scientifically this discovery can be compared to the finding of the tropopause in 1902. As newinformation and knowledge about magnetospheric phenomena grew, the need for novel equipment and morespecific measurements in well defined regions became a necessity. The importance of measurements in theauroral regions was understood internationally.

The University of Oulu was founded in 1959, and the teaching of physics started in the autumn of the sameyear. In looking for a suitable research topic, one that would not overlap any other field of Finnish research,

the Physics Department leadership decided to build a telescope for observations of cosmic ray muons. Thechallenge of building a muon telescope was accepted by Mr Pekka Tanskanen, who completed the work bythe end of 1963. It was soon to be complemented by a neutron monitor for measuring the nucleoniccomponent of cosmic rays.67 This instrument has now been in operation for more than 38 years and is todayone of the few cosmic ray instruments existing in Europe.

In October, 1961, at the initiation of Mr Jean Pierre Legrand at the Laboratoire de Physique Cosmique of theCentre National de Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), a group of European cosmic ray researchers met in Parisunder the chairmanship of Prof. C. de Jager from the Utrecht Observatory, to discuss the possibilities ofestablishing a coordinated programme to measure cosmic rays, utilising balloon-borne instrumentation. InApril 1962, at a second unofficial meeting, Prof. Alfred Ehmert was chosen to take the lead of thisorganisation, which in December 1963 was given the name SPARMO (Solar Particles and RadiationMonitoring Organization).68

In 1964 Mr Tanskanen, now in the Oulu University Physics Department, met with Professor Pfotzer andProfessor Ehmert, both directors at the Max Planck Institut fr Aeronomie, Lindau, Germany. ProfessorPfotzer suggested that the University of Oulu should join some of the existing SPARMO-teams to participatein balloon observations in and around the auroral zone. Since the University of Oulu was located at thegateway to the auroral zone, Mr Tanskanen realised that partipation in auroral research involving highaltitude measurements using balloons would be just right for their laboratory, which was still in its

67 Matti Salo-Matti Lackman: Oulun ylipiston historia. (A History of the University of Oulu) p. 413.68 Space Activities in Finland in 1967, a report from Secretary of FNC/COSPAR, Martti Tiuri, 1 March 1968

(FNC/COSPAR); Space Physics p. 338.


22/36

18

infancy, and lacked both manpower and financial resources to carry out research with moresophisticated space research tools such as satellites.69

The year 1965 marked the beginning of Finnish balloon launches as a member in SPARMO. In its firstcampaign, the University of Oulu operated from Finland in close cooperation with a team from theLaboratoire de Physique Cosmique, Meudon, led by Mr Legrand. The French team built the instruments,supplied the entire radio telecommunication system, and provided the plastic balloons to be used. Theballoons were able to carry the payloads to an altitude corresponding to about 6-7 mb (~30 km). The firstballoon was launched on 24 July 1965, and before 5 September a total of 24 balloons had been launchedfrom Ivalo in Finnish Lapland. The last balloon campaign took place in 1979.

Space-related activities at the University of Oulu were rapidly expanding. In February 1966, under theleadership of Prof. Juhani Oksman, reception of weather satellite data was started at a station near Oulu.Ground-based recording of geomagnetic micropulsations was being made in cooperation with the Universityof Alaska, with equipment donated by the same university, thus extending the measurement series of over125 years still being continued at the Finnish Meteorological Institute.70

As noted before, in the early days of the Finnish space era research focused on magnetospheric physics. Theactivity required international ties, some of which were maintained through the organisations, and some ofwhich were personal.71 The IMS was initiated at the beginning of the 1970s. Itwas an ICSU-programme, a

continuation in the same series as IGY. It was also global, performed from 1976-1979.

72

IMS became one ofthe main international activities in space research.73 During the IMS the Geomagnetic Division at the FinnishMeteorological Institute, together with other Finnish geophysicists, had an opportunity to open contacts withSoviet geophysical researchers. Contacts with the Geophysical Institute of Apatity near Murmansk, theIZMIRAN institute and the University of Leningrad became especially important. In conclusion, in the mid-1970s magnetospheric measurements developed to cover a very wide range of activities. Finland participatedin observations along with a large international scientific community. The involvement of Austria, theFederal Republic of Germany, Norway, Sweden, the Soviet Union and the United States were particularlylively.74

From a Finnish point of view EISCAT (European Incoherent Scatter Radar facility) was the most importanttool developed during the IMS in the late 1970s. EISCAT was formed in 1976 as a international association,the participants being the German Federal Republic, France, Great Britain, Sweden, Norway and Finland.Finland participated with a 5 % share of the cost.75 That was the first commitment by the Finnish state, in the

form of the Finnish Academy. EISCAT was not just a programme, but a new permanent line of SpaceResearch. EISCAT was a radar programme and was preceded by the STARE-programme (ScandinavianTwin Auroral Radar Experiment). Taken together IMS, STARE and EISCAT marked the accentuation ofradar methods in Finland in studying the magnetosphere in the 1970s.

In the mid 1970sa lively magnetospheric research activity developed in Finland. The Geomagnetic Divisionat the Finnish Meteorological Institute (FMI) attracted several young scientists who focused their researchinto studies of the magnetosphere.Phil. lic.Risto Pellinen (who later became a key player in space activitiesin Finland) moved from the University of Helsinki to the Geomagnetic Division in 1972 and focused his

69 FNC/COSPAR Protocol 20 Feb. 1970 (FNC/COSPAR).70 A Report of the International Activities 1966-1967, FNC/IUGG, 18 Feb. 1967 (IUGG).71 A few examples of the early contacts: Minutes of the 1st meeting of the Western European Subcommission of the

International Commission for Artificial Satellites held at Lagonissi, Athens, 28-29 April 1965, and C. Sucksdorff :Earth Magnetism and Aeronomy, report, 29 Jan. 1965, and First European Earth and Planetary PhysicsColloquium, Reading, UK, 30 March-2 April 1971, (IUGG).

72 C. Sucksdorff:Kansainvlinen magnetosfrin tutkimus IMS ja sen tulokset Suomessa (InternationalMagnetospheric Study IMS and its Results in Finland), X Geofysiikan pivt, Helsinki 1981.

73 A circular, to FMI , SCOSTEP (Special Committee on solar-terrestrial Physics)-working meeting, 8-18 Oct. 1974in Schloss Kleinheubach, 1 Oct. 1974, and Risto Pellinen: Model for the onset of a magnetospheric substorm,1977; C. Sucksdorff: International magnetosperic study IMS and its result in Finland, 6 March 1981 (Geo corr.-see p. 25 Unpublished Sources).

74 Aide mmoire: Data handling of the N-MAC Night 6-7 January 1975 (Geo corr.).75 C. Sucksdorff et al.: Space Physics p. 329; The EISCAT Scientific Association (www.eiscat.com/about.html).


23/36

19

research on the physics of the auroral phenomena. His work was supervised by Professor Walter Heikkilafrom the University of Texas at Dallas.76 Both acted as catalysts in the international cooperation (especiallytowards the USA) and obtained remarkable scientific results during the IMS.

In the context of magnetospheric research projects the ties with foreign colleagues were greatly intensified.Part of the new research was carried out with equipment installed in Finnish Lapland,77 but the ties workedwell in both directions. In fact Finnish space research, especially of the Geomagnetic Division and

University of Oulu, integrated well with the Global Space Research. The Geomagnetic Division became acentral institution for space research at the time, although other institutes were also actively involved, TheUniversity of Oulu, together with the Sodankyl Geophysical Observatory, developed teaching programmessupporting auroral research topics, whereas the University of Turku focused on studies of cosmic ray airshowers. Rockets and satellites became part of everyday life for Finns as well.

Government budgets were still tight in the 1970s however. New projects were not easily initiated. But at theend of 1970s signs appeared of a changing situation.78 Joining EISCAT was in fact one of the first signs of a better time. In a few years, up to the beginning of the 1980s, many sectors experienced remarkableimprovement in their capacity to operate. This was also the case in space research. From the beginning of the1980s the Government rapidly had more resources available.

The progress made in international co-operation emphasised the increasing importance of bilateralcollaboration, as distinct from formal membership in international organisations. At the end of the 1970s the

Soviet Union made an offer to Finland for a cooperation project to manufacture satellite instruments.79

Otherforms of bilateral cooperation, for example the Finnish-Swedish cooperation in Kiruna, and Finno-Sovietcooperation in Apatity, have already been mentioned.

The negotiations aimed at manufacturing a satellite instrument together with the Soviet Union were notsuccessful at this stage. The cooperation carried out with the Swedes culminated in 1982 in the Viking 2satellite project.80 Finland was offered an opportunity to participate in the project with her own instrument, oras co-investigator in other programmes. Viking 2 was planned for launch in 1987. The estimated cost forproviding a purely Finnish instrument forViking 2 was around 100 Million Finnish marks (29 Million Euroin 2002). The scientific community and Vaisala Ltd were willing to participate, but other industrial sectorsdid not show sufficient interest. The required readiness was not there and, the country not being a member ofESA, no guarantees of industrial return could be given. Finnish industry simply would not take the requiredrisks. The project fell apart.81

76 R.Pellinen to Walter Heikkila, Texas 1.Oct. 1974 (Geo corr.). University of Texas at Dallas;Professor Walter J. Heikkila, retired (www.utdallas.edu/dept/physics/faculty.html).

77 Aide mmoire: Data handling of the N-MAC Night 6-7 January 1975. J.Kisabeth (USA), W. Heikkila (USA),D. Klumpar (BRD), D. Winningham (UK), H. Ranta and T.Turunen (Finland), R. Pellinen (Finland) acts as acentral point of this study (Geo corr.).

78 Ilkka Seppinen: Valtavyl. p. 211-219, and p. 88-96, about this change in Finland. .79 Avaruustutkimuslaitostyryhmn (Space Research Centre Committees paper) muistio p. 6.80 Aide mmoire, a draft. 21 Sept. 1989 (Geo corr.).81 FMI/Div. of Geomagnetism C. Sucksdorff: Finnish effort to participate in the Viking II project, 3 Jan. 1983

(Geo corr.).


24/36

20


25/36

21

8 1983: ESA, at Last!

The conclusion drawn in the space research sector was clear at the start of the 1980s: Finland must join ESA,even though it would be expensive.82 For example, in 1983, Sweden invested over 500 Million crowns(199 Million Euro in 2002) in space research, but estimated that the benefits for industry would be even morein the long run. The moment had come to reinforce the traditional areas of competence. In the field of auroralresearch the existing capacity, equipment, and relations should be exploited. The Academy of Finland shouldsupport research projects promoting international collaboration in the application areas of satellitetechnologies. By putting priority on space research projects the Academy of Finland should encourage theapplicants to focus on their scientific projects in the application of satellite data. This was the way to aim forthe objective of ESA membership, and for participation in space instrument manufacturing.83

In the summer of 1983, the Finnish Meteorological Institute emphasised that Finland would have to join ESA before any major progress could be made in space research.84 A positive signal came, when the FinnishParliament unanimously accepted the payment for EUMETSAT weather satellite membership in 1983. 85

EUMETSAT was fully European, and the membership provided not only the weather satellite images for theuse of the Finnish Meteorological Institute, but opportunities for Finnish industry to participate in theorganisations procurements.

Joining ESA was drawing closer now. In January 1984 the government sent a delegation to negotiate on thematter. One member of the delegation, Counsellor of Education Osmo Ranta from the Ministry of Education,was provided with a memorandum well prepared by Christian Sucksdorff. The memorandum included all thekey arguments for membership.86 Finland chose associate membership from the alternatives available. Theassociate membership negotiations were initiated in 1984, and the text was signed in September 1986.87

Finland became an Associate Member of ESA at the beginning of 1987.88

Parallel to this rise of Finnish space research is the development of the national financing system. TheFinnish Technological Agency (TEKES) was established in 1983 to foster not only space research but thetechnological development, under the authority of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. TEKES has beenan important financer of Finnish space technology.89 Moreover, TEKES is an integral part of the neweconomic-social system, which developed in Finland at the turn of the 1970-1980s. The National AdvisoryCouncil on Space was established under the authority of the Ministry of Transport on 1 June 1985.90

Finnish participation in the Soviet space programmes belongs to the same rather accelerated phase ofdevelopment. This was achieved through Sweden. After Risto Pellinens membership from 1982 onwards inthe Swedish Research Committee on Space Administration, Finnish space researchers had available all theinformation on Sweden and ESA. Sweden had a common satellite project in progress with the Soviet Union.This was INTERBALL, consisting of two satellites measuring auroras. Sweden provided a plasmaspectrometer to the project. Finnish researchers were immediately accepted to join the project when theyexpressed their willingness. The first planning meeting was held at the Finnish Meteorological Institute inJune 1984. This happened even before the economic and political aspects of the project were accepted. TheForeign Ministry looked into the political aspects of the project without finding anything dubious, and

82 Aide memoire on the importance of space research for Finland, s.d. probaly 7 April 1983 (Geo corr.).

83 Avaruusteknologian kehittmistarpeet ja - tavoitteet(Method to develop space technology), p. i-iii, 4-6;Evaluation of Finnish Space Science, p. 4.

84 FMI Director Erkki Jatila,Aide Memoire draft 10 August 1983 (Geo corr.).85 FMI/Jatila, Sucksdorff to Communications Ministry 12 August 1983 (Geo corr.).86 FMI/C. Sucksdorff to secretary Osmo Ranta Ministry of Education 30 Jan. 1984 (Geo corr.).87 Risto Pellinen: Suomen avaruus.p. 73.88 Avaruustutkimuslaitostyryhmn muistio (Report of Space Research Intitute Committee) p. 6.89 Avaruustutkimuslaitostyhmn muistio (Report of Space Research Intitute Committee) p. 6.90 Minister of Communications Matti Luttinen: Communiqu on Establisment of National Advisory Council on

Space 20 June 1985 (Geo avaptk 1);Avaruustutkimuslaitostyhmn muistio (Report of Space Research IntituteCommittee) p. 6.


26/36

22

TEKES decided to give financial support to the project.91 Initially the Finnish side acted through the Swedeswith the approval of the Soviet Union, but in January 1985 the Finnish delegation met Soviet researchers inMoscow and direct collaboration was initiated. In January 1987 an agreement between the Governments ofFinland and Soviet Union was signed for the basis of the collaboration. 92 In July 1988 the Soviet Unionlaunched the Phobos 1 and 2 spacecraft, destination Mars. Finland had involvement in both satellites. Thetwo INTERBALL satellites were launched much later, in the mid-1990s.

This was the starting point for Finlands getting involved on a broader scale in scientific collaboration withEuropean and Soviet Union space activities. All the political obstacles had disappeared. Space reseach wasrelatively free of the tensions and threats which marked some other areas in the cold war. COSPAR had evenacted as a cushion from the cold war since, within COSPAR, the United States and the Soviet Union hadrespected a collaborative spirit from 1958 onwards.

91 Risto Pellinen: Suomen avaruus. p. 71.92 Risto Pellinen: Suomen avaruus. p. 76


27/36

23

9 From Earth to Mars

By the year 1987 Finnish space research was rising rapidly. Finland was strongly involved in ESA activitiesas an associate member and as a full member in the scientific programmes. Finland had a science andresearch agreement with the Soviet Union93 and the cooperation between the two countries expanded, ascooperation with Sweden was continuing strongly. The range of cooperation included Finnish made PI-instruments, and Co-I participation in instrument projects.

At the Finnish Meteorological Institute, where the accelerating progress was felt the most, an initiative wasmade for the reorganisation of Finnish space research. It was generally felt that space research was wellsuited to the various research institutions and univerisities, but that the scattered organisation needed aunifying research centre to support its aims.

For the new research centre the following supporting tasks were proposed: 1) the negotiation andmaintenance of industrial relations, 2) the maintenance of technical data banks, 3) assistance of the researchand industrial groups in legal and contractual matters.94 Administrative tasks such as contractual matters hadrapidly grown, but scientific administration also needed more inputs. The National Advisory Council onSpace needed a full time chairman at the professorial level, since the Chairman should also represent Finland

at ESA. The council needed staff, and its members should represent a high level in the governmentaladministration or politics. The secretaries of the different committees were also supposed to be employed ona full time basis.95

The Space Research Centre was planned to be established within the Finnish Meteorological Institute.96 Theexisting institutes would continue as its research organs where the number of workers would bestrengthened, and ultimately have permanent posts. However, administrative tasks would be moved to asupporting unit. Planning would be carried out at the National Advisory Council on Space, which wouldattain agency status. The Council itself would be comprised of experts, similar to various other committees.In this way the direction of space research would be kept within the grip of the scientific and technologicalsector. In 1987, when this plan wascomplete, everything in Finland seemed to be ready and the sky was thelimit. Money was no problem, it was even plentiful.

Finnish space research required a radical reorganisation. Examples were found in Sweden, where a

comparable organisation had been realised.97

At the very least the status of the National Advisory Council onSpace should have been strengthened immediately in order to be able to assume the tasks of conductingspace research financing and co-ordination of space research.98 This degree of status promotion met withopposition. At the end of 1988 the establishment of a less ambitious support group for space activities withinthe authority of the Communications Ministry was introduced. This support group included legal, technical,and economic expertise. The associated memberships in ESA and increased activities had brought with themmore complicated international and national contracts and applications. In 1986 the economic activity ofspace research was only about 36 Million marks (8.48 Million Euro in 2002) but it was estimated that by theyear 1992 the amount would increase to 82 Million (19.33 Million Euro in 2002). 99 Moreover, if it is bornein mind that scientific and technological activities were increasing rapidly at the same time, betterorganisation was clearly desirable.

93 FMI Memorandum for Finance Ministry, 26 May 1987 (FMI/Geo corr.)94 Aide mmoire: The FMI view of near future developing prospects in Finnish Space Research 16 Nov. 1987

(Geo corr.).95 Ibidem.96 Evaluation of Finnish space science, p. 7. The Geophysics Division of FMI was in 1994 evaluated as clearly the

strongest and most active research group in Finland. Development to this result began at latest at the start of the1970s as a conscious aim. By 1987 this setting was allready clearly felt, maybe even more pointedly than later.

97 Avaruustutkimuslaitostyryhmn muistio (Report of Space Research Intitute Committee) p. 11-12.98 C. Sucksdorff: Supporting Group to Space Activities, A Proposal of FMI, 11 February 1988, (Geo corr.).99 Ibidem.


28/36

24

In 1990 the worst recession in decades began. All new Finnish activities requiring Government funding were buried. The Space Research Centre did not appear again on the agenda until the year 2000. From thescientific point of view activities continued well, or even increased. Finland established its position amongspace nations. In the Soviet/Russian programme, Phobos, Mars 96, Interball, Spectrum-X and Radioastronwere the major milestones. In ESA programmes, SOHO, Cluster, Cassini-Huygens, ISO, XMM, INTEGRAL,SMART-1, Rosetta, Mars Express, Planckand Herschelhave had components developed and manufacturedin Finland, as well as scientific participation. In addition, Envisathas a large Finnish element onboard, ashave some recently launched NASA space probes. The recently begun cooperation with France in theNetLanderMars programme may become one of the largest Finnish contributions in space research in thecurrent decade.100

Finnish space industry was brought to life together with science instrument activities. The first contacts weremade in 1986 and today more than 30 companies and 200 peoples are involved in the space sector. There arefour major companies covering system design, space electronics and constructions, microwave-, X- andgamma-ray technologies. In science there are three major geographical centres of activity involvinguniversity departments and research institutions both in astronomy and space physics. About 90 people areactive in space-related science, having an annual project budget of 10 Million Euro, which is expected togrow by 30 % in the coming five years.101

In the spring of 1993 the Finnish government decided to initiate negotiations for Finlands full membershipin ESA.102 Full membership was obtained at the beginning of 1995. With full membership Finland has finallyrisen to the same level in space research as other ESA member states.103

100 Risto Pellinen:History of Space Activities in Finland. ESA History Workshop, Paris, Jan. 25. 2001.101 Ibidem.102 Space Activity, Research and Strategy p. 1.103 Ibidem, p. 8.


29/36

25

Sources

A Unpublished sources:

International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG),

Finnish Institute of Geodesy, Kirkkonummi

Correspondence 1943-1974.

Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki

Correspondence with COSPAR

Gustaf Jrnefelts collection 1960-1963 (GEO/GJE)

Correspondence of National Finnish Committee of COSPAR 1964-1973 (FIN/COSPAR)

Correspondence of Geophysics Division

Correspondence 1974-1991 (Geo corr.)

Finno-Soviet scientific-technological cooperation (TT-yhteisty)

Meetings with Geo, and miscellaneous (Geo TT)Board for Space Activities

Minutes and related material 1985-1997 (Avaptk 1-7)

Miscellaneous 1985-1998 (Avadiv 1-3)

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Archives, Helsinki

Series UM90 Avaruustutkimus (UM90 Space Research)

Agreements, conferences (UM90AASK)

ESRO, ESRANGE (UM90AEE)

Space Research in different countries (UM90AM)

Space Research, Aide Memoires etc. (UM90Ty)

ESA, Meteosat (UM90ESA)

National Central Archive, HelsinkiCollection of Society of Sciences in Finland

Correspondence and Memoires of Magnetic and Meteorological Central Institute Hc 1 (MMC Hc 1)

Polar Expedition Hc 1 (Pe Hc1)

Correspondence Ea 5-7 1873-1886


30/36

26

B Published Sources and Literature:

Ahola, K., Koskinen, H., Lahtinen J. (eds.). Space Research in Finland. Report to COSPAR 2000. Finnish National Committee of COSPAR, TEKES National Technology Agency, Academy of Finland, Helsinki

2000.Avaruusalan tutkimus- ja kehittmistoiminnan kansallinen strategia, Avaruusasiain neuvottelukunnanmietint. Kauppa- ja teollisuusministerin neuvottelukuntaraportteja 2/1994.

Avaruusasiain neuvottelukunta, Avaruustoiminta Suomessa, Kansallinen strategia ja kehittmisen tavoitteet1999. Kauppa- ja teollisuusministerin raportteja 1/1999. Helsinki 1999.

Avaruustutkimuslaitostyryhmn muistio. Opetusministerin tyryhmien muistioita 24:2000.

Bilstein, Roger E.: Orders of Magnitude.A History of the NACA and NASA, 1915-1990. The NASA HistorySeries, NASA Scientific and Technical Information Division, 1989.

Evaluation of Finnish Astronomy. Report of an evaluation panel established by the Academy of Finland.Publications of the Academy of Finland 4/00, Suomen Akatemia, Helsinki 2000.

Evaluation of Finnish space science: report of an evaluation committee established by the Academy ofFinland and the Technology Development Centre of Finland. Publications of the Academy of Finland 5/94,Helsinki 1994.

Fifty Years of Environmental Measurements. Vaisala 1936-1986 (editor Hannu Pitknen). Vaisala oy, 1986.

Galeev, A.A and Tamkovich, D.G.M.: Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.The 35

thanniversary. Moscow, IKI 1999.

Gavaghan, Helen: The History of EUMETSAT, EUMETSAT 2001.

Haerendel G, S. Grzedzielski, G. Cavallo and B. Battrick (eds): 40 Years of COSPAR. COSPAR/ESA,ESA BR-135, 1998.

Holmberg, Peter: The history of physics in Finland 1828-1918. Helsinki 1992.

Jager, Cornelis de:A Cold War in Space Research, in 40 Years of COSPAR.Jotuni, Pertti: Vlilasku kuuhun. Kirjayhtym 1969.

Kelh, Vin:Pieni avaruuskirja. Ajatuskustannus, Helsinki 2000.

Kernen, Jaakko et all.:Juhlajulkaisu Gustaf Melanderin 60-vuotispivksi.WSOY 1920.

Krige, John and Arturo Russo: A History of The European Space Agency, 1958-1987, Vol. 1, The Story ofESRO and ELDO, 1958-1973, ESA SP-1235

Lemstrm, Selim: Aurore borale tude gnrale des phnomnes produits par les courants lectriques delatmosphre. Paris, Gauthier-Villard 1886. Lemstrm, Selim: Exploration internationale des rgionspolaires 1882-1883 et 1883-1884 expdition polaire finlandais. Helsingfors, Simelius 1886.

Lemstrm, Selim: Magnetiska observationer under svenska polar-expeditonen r 1868. Stockholm 1870.

Lemstrm, Selim: Om den finska Polarexpeditionen till Sodankyl och Kultala ren 1882-83 och 1883-84jmte Skildringar frn Lappland. Helsingfors, Finska Litteratur-sllskapets tryckeri 1885.

Lemstrm, Selim: Om polarljuset eller norrskenet. Stockholm, Adolf Bonnier 1886.

Lemstrm, Selim: Suomalaisesta tutkimusretkest Sodankyln ja Kultalaan vuosina 1882-1883 ja1883.1884 ynn kuvaelmia Lapista matkueen jsenten kirjoittamat. Helsinki, Edlund 1885.

Liikenneministerin julkaisuja 6/92. Ehdotus Sodankyln geofysiikan observatorioiden kehittmiseksi,5.2.1992.


31/36

27

Matti Klinge, Rainer Knapas, Anto Leikola ja John Strmberg. Keisarillinen Aleksanterin Yliopisto1808-1917, toinen osa. Helsinki, Otava 1989

New Opportunities and Challenges. International Evaluation of the Finnish Meteorological Institute.Ministry of Transport and Communications Finland Publications 1/97, Helsinki 1997.

Nevanlinna, Heikki:Revontulet -tarua ja totta. www.fmi.fi/tutkimus

Operational and financial plan 1997-2000. Background material for the international evaluation of theFinnish Meteorological Institute 1996. FMI 1996.

Pellinen, Risto: Suomen avaruustutkimuksen historiaa henkilkohtaisia muistikuvia ja kokemuksia alkuajantaipaleelta. Teoksessa: Raudsepp, Paul (toim.): Suuntana Mars! Helsinki, Raud Publishing Ltd.1993.

Pohjoismaiden neuvosto 25 vuotta. Helsinki 1977.

Research. Background material for the international evaluation of the Finnish Meteorological Institute 1996.FMI 1996.

Salo, Matti-Lackman, Matti: Oulun yliopiston historia 1958-1993. Oulun yliopisto 1998.

Seppinen, Ilkka:Ilmatieteen laitos 1838-1988. Ilmatieteen laitos 1988.

Seppinen, Ilkka: Valtavyl Suomeen. Liikenneministeri 100 vuotta. Vapk-kustannus-Liikenneministeri

1992.Stiernstedt, Jan: Sweden in Space. Swedish Space Activities 1959-1972. ESA SP-1248, 2001.

Sucksdorff, C. et al.: Space Physics. Geophysica (2001), 37 (1-2), 309-355.

Sullivan, Walter: Assault on the Unknown. The International Geophysical Year. Hodder and Stoughton,London. 1962.

Suomen tieteen tila ja taso. Katsaus tutkimukseen ja sen toimintaympristn Suomessa 1990-luvun lopulla.Suomen Akatemian julkaisuja 6/00. Suomen Akatemia, Helsinki 2000.

Valtiontalouden tarkastusvirasto. Tarkastuskertomus 8/95. Ilmatieteen laitoksen toiminta palvelujentuottajana ja tutkimuslaitoksena. Avaruustutkimus s. 128-166.


32/36

28


33/36

29

Annexes

Annex 1 Highlights in the National Space Effort

1960-63 Preparation for COSPAR membership; Muon telescope built for measuring cosmic raymuons

1964 Finland joined COSPAR 2.6.1964; Neutron monitor built for measuring the nucleoniccomponent of cosmic rays

1965 First national COSPAR committee nominated. Finnish participation in internationalballoon activities to measure auroral X-rays

1966 First national activity report at COSPAR IX Plenary Meeting,1967 Germany proposes Finland to receive its first satellite data in Lapland1968 Finnish industry proposes that Finland joins ESRO1969 Comprehensive proposal for joining ESRO published

1970 National subcommittee for space matters established1971 First results of the analysis of Apollo 11 rock samples reported1972 Finland becomes active in EISCAT preparation1973 First proposal to join ESA to be established in 19751974 Preparation for the International Magnetospheric Study1975 Final report of the analysis of Apollo rocks1976 Geodetic laser observations started1977 STARE auroral radar started operation in Finland1978 ESA membership considered in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs1979 A working group for ESA membership preparation proposed

1980 ESA preparation stopped by the Ministry of Trade and Industry1981 ESA membership proposed to the Ministry of Education1982 Sweden invites Finland to join Viking 2 satellite mission1983 No special highlights1984 First official contacts with ESA1985 Proposals for Space Agency activities in Finland1986 ESA membership negotiations, signing of the agreements1987 Preparations for the Plenary Session 1988 in Finland1988 Plenary Session activities, first space experiment launched1989 Proposal for the organisation of scientific space research in Finland

1990 First comprehensive space strategy published


34/36

Annex2

AdministrativeOrganisation

(Source:ReporttoCOSPAR2000)

Organisatio

nforAdministrationofSpaceMattersinFinland

FinnishSpaceCommmittee

SecretariatoftheFinnis

hSpaceCommittee

BilateralAc

tivities

EUSpaceRT

DPolicy

CoordinationofE

SArelations

ProjectFunding/Natio

nalProgrammes

Tekes

MinistryofTrade

andIndustry

PhDProgram

mes

BilateralActiv

ities

ESASpaceScience

ProjectFunding/Nationa

lProgrammes

AcademyofFinland

MinistryofEducation

MinistryofForeignA

ffairs

MinistryofDefen

ce

MinistryofEnvironment

MinistryofTransportandCo

mmunications

Otherministries

Government

30


35/36

31

Annex 3 Statistical Data on Space Science in Finland 1988-1992

(Source: 55th SPC meeting presentation of National space science programmes)

Programme

1988 1990 1992

Total Space expenditure 7,3 18,1 33,7

Contribution to ESA 2,6 6,1 8,0

Total ESA/SPC

1,7 6,5 8,8

National andBilateral space science

projects 0,7 4,7 4,3

* Monetary figures in MAU. 1 AU= about 1 Euro.


36/36

nex4

FinnishSpaceFunding1995-1999;values

inMEuro

(Sou

rce:ReporttoCOSPAR2000)

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Tekes

National,Bilateral&ESA

Funding

14

.3

16.0

17.7

16.7

17.7

16.5

25.0

AcademyofFinland

ScientificResearch

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

6.8*

2.2

1.7

MinistryofTradeand

Ind

ustry

1.2

1.4

2.8

1.7

1.7

1.7

2.0

Others,

Infrastructure,Research&

Development

4.7

4.7

4.7

4.7

5.3

19.3

11.3

Total

22

.7

24.6

27.7

25.6

31.5

39.7

40.0

Mostlycoversyears1998-2000

32

Finland and the Space Era

Documents

Transcript of Finland and the Space Era